David Sampson

You have to have a point where it is 89 to 92.

You look at it, you get the books of a company, you interview the officers of the company, you understand exactly what the product is that the company sells.

You understand what the audience is.

You make projections.

You have low case, base case and upside case projections of what a company can do, what it can sell, what it can develop.

And then you take a multiple of that that is generally industry defined.

So it can be five times revenue, 10 times EBIT, I don't give a what the number is, but you do what is on Wall Street where there are people paid a lot of money to figure out what the value of a company is and then what the choke point would be for their client who's trying to acquire or their client who's trying to sell.

And having John on the other side, the reason why it's a bon rev, it's like a dream come true,

is because he's not, and I can't imagine that if Bob Iger is listening to this, I would assume he's smiling somewhere, you know, on vacation.

But the difference of $3 billion with the value of rights or the value of an asset, that adds up.

It's like when you do construction of your house and you're over budget in your bathroom by a grand, who cares, it's a grand, but then all of a sudden you get granded to death and you realize you're out 100 grand.

shareholders get punished because it has a quashing impact on your share price.

Because my blanket thought is that you were screwing us.

Even if I couldn't possibly, and that was my argument.

It's not that black and white.

What I'm saying is you knew very well that owners wanted money for players.

And that is how you got the votes.

Exactly.

The fact is the asset was worth more and it was going to be worth more and we should have held it.

That's the bottom line.